Life is so interesting.  I had two phone calls this afternoon.  One was Judi, saying that she will have surgery next Thursday.  She liked the surgeon (which is always a nice bonus).  She said that unlike her other doctor, he said that bile duct cancer would be preferable to pancreatic….so whatever.  He also said they just are not going to know exactly what they’re dealing with until they get in there. They will remove the bile duct and possibly part of the pancreas and liver, rebuilding it with part of her small intestine.  Sooooooo…..things are set for next Thursday.  V’ron and Eileen—you are on your own for Ian Hunter I’m afraid. I’ll be with my sister….  I’ve got to figure out whether I’m going to fly or drive, figure out a hotel, etc. Part of me wants Ernie and the boys to come with me because at times like this I just want to gather my family close around me.  I’ll probably go myself though.

The other phone call was from Leo’s principal.  She asked me to remove her name from my blog because her son had googled her and found this site and she didn’t want him seeing the adult content on here.  Yup.  My racy, objectionable little blog, steeped in filth and adult language.  As she said, the other references for her were related to church and school….so this one, although factual, must have seemed pretty darn objectionable. She did say that she should probably have some kind of screens up on her computer…..  Uh, yeah…..because if she thinks that thesandwichlife.com is the most offensive thing her kid is going to find on the internet….. 

Gee, I wonder if I’ll get a call from Arthur Culver……

So an interesting conundrum, huh?  I write my blog because I find it both comforting and entertaining, and it lets friends and family, and anyone else who wishes (as it’s a great big old world out there), know what’s going on with my life.  So while I certainly I don’t have any right to write falsehoods about anyone, do I not have the right to use someone’s name, someone who is basically a public figure in their role, while factually explaining something that was going on with my family?  Do I need to edit myself out of fear that someone googling around might find their name here and see another post that had a nasty word?  Now to be fair, she did not demand that I delete her name, she said if I didn’t want to that was fine too.  I’m glad to make her happy and delete her name in order to protect her child from harm however…

The internet….it’s a whole new world, isn’t it?  As Mitch Easter said, "no one can have an off night without it being online…."

huh

7 thoughts on “Afternoon phone calls…..

  1. That’s one of the reason I use pseudonyms instead of real names. Cause most of the time, I don’t really want the people involved to find me. It was nice of you to take her name off because I’m not sure you really had any obligation to.

  2. That’s one of the reason I use pseudonyms instead of real names. Cause most of the time, I don’t really want the people involved to find me. It was nice of you to take her name off because I’m not sure you really had any obligation to.

  3. That’s one of the reason I use pseudonyms instead of real names. Cause most of the time, I don’t really want the people involved to find me. It was nice of you to take her name off because I’m not sure you really had any obligation to.

  4. See, I do try to be aware of that, but frankly, I didn’t care if she came across it because I had been completely factual…. I may not have had any obligation to take her name off but I figured it didn’t hurt and I didn’t really care….obviously she did……just interesting…..

  5. Yeah, it didn’t hurt you to remove her name, but girlfriend needs to get a clue.
    Whether people believe it or not, the internet/blogs are the media. And if you are a public figure, you will be in the media. And all your reportage on your conversations with her are public information. It’s not her call to determine where public information is used.
    She has issues with her kids being exposed to internet nasties. REmoveing her name from your blog doesn’t address that problem. She’s only getting this because she happens to know you and you are being kind. No newspaper would comply with such a request — for that matter nobody in the MSM. As long as you were factual and correct, she has no expectation that you would do so.
    And again, she’s not addressing the actual issue at hand. Her son found a place with content that she found objectionable. Rather than asking the content provider to censor the content (which is what she’s really asking for here, and was lucky to get in your case), she needs to either install filters (which doesn’t really solve the problem of a child’s curiosity anyway), or better still, take an interest in what the kid is reading and talk to them about those words. This works, it really does. I have no filters at home, and when Stella comes upon a site with language she finds objectionable, she gets embarassed and clicks away. Or she’ll come and ask me what its about and why anybody would say/do such a thing. It leads to excellent (albeit difficult) conversations.
    I know that when she gets older, she may not be so embarassed by the content. But we’ve already begun the foundation for self-filtering, giving her the tools to determine what is appropriate for herself. When I was a kid, my mother told the public library it was OK for me to go in the adult section. And you know what? I too shied away from material that wasn’t appropriate, because that attitude was consistent with everything else in my life (church, my mom’s attitude and opinions, etc.). This crunchy granola approach REALLY WORKS.

  6. I would not have removed it but I understand you’re in a different situation. This woman is supposed to be an educator?????????
    I think she was worried about performance based evaluation and to use her child…

Thoughts?